On April 15, 1984, the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) between the United States and the USSR suddenly broke down at the insistence of the Russian Foreign Minister. Two weeks later, Congress passes an Act wherein the United States will purchase and operate all of the nation's airlines. In all likelihood, Congress' power to enact this legislation will derive from:

a. its power to tax and provide for the general welfare

b. it's power to raise and support an army and declare war

c. it's power to regulate commerce

d. its powers to make laws regarding territory and other property belonging to the US

To see the answer go here>>>>http://goo.gl/4mlle Click on "Look Inside This Book" Select the table of contents. Scroll to the end, select questions and answers. Scroll down to the answer for question 3.

Reading this question has reminded me how far I still have to go before I am ready to tackle any law exam. It is concepts like this post, in Torts, Criminal Law, and Contracts, that take more than a year to absorb; more specifically, all the nuances and details that are embedded in tort, criminal law, and contract theory. Those of you who have studied law school multiple choice questions know what I am talking about.

Could not find the answer, and the bar was several years ago, but I am guessing Commerce Clause.

On that note - I think it's time for a constitutional ammendment that more clearly defines the scope of congress' regulating authority under the commerce clause. It is nearly limitless and now we are stretching it to the point where we can be forced to purchase something whether we want it or not. Would you want to be required to buy a gun? A Bible? A hybrid vehicle? Carbon credits?

I almost certain that we'll get some sort of definitive answer as to the scope of the Commerce Clause. The denial of Virginia's writ of certiorari to the SOTUS notwithstanding, the Court will have to decide the constitutionality of the healthcare reform legislation with regards to the Commerce Clause. This should be interesting. I don't see how the Court gets around putting some sort of limits on Congress's power here.

Logged

lawyerintraining

so, the point of these questions is to prove that the person with the answer book is "equal" to those without it? You do know that you could take a homeless crack addict who flunked out of the 3rd grade on the 4th attempt and get them to do the same thing right?

I understand your desire to "prove" your online training is equal. I respect that. This is not accomplishing that goal.

I didn't get the impression that InterAlia was trying to prove her online training was equal to anything. She doesn't have anything to prove to anybody. Online training is more vigorous than brick and mortar training because you have a shorter period of time within which a lot of material needs to be absorbed. And, most law school exams are open book. Online law school exams are not.